Doesn't really make it invalid, if Friedman cited Dater does Dater really have to say "I told Friedman what you just heard him say on TV"? Sounds more like he was elaborating on the exchange they had. Not like it matters though.

Maybe old news by now.
I wonder why the Pens are in on this, like they need more centers.

Quote:

Sources say Senators GM Bryan Murray has held talks with Colorado Avalanche GM Greg Sherman about a deal for the restricted free agent centre, however, the indications are the asking price is significantly high.

Quote:

Expect O’Reilly to land somewhere as the Avs try to clear up this sour relationship. The Leafs, Bruins, Rangers and Penguins have all held talks with Sherman, who would like to send him to an eastern conference team.

Well, I wanted to know so I could shut up all the people pushing MDZ face-first out the door in the case of NYR naming him untouchable.

I think pushing him out the door would be more akin to agreeing to something like MDZ for a conditional 7th rounder.

You can say people are undervaluing him, perhaps, but I don't think anyone here is so eager to get rid of him they aren't considering value at all. Almost none of us would do an MDZ for RoR swap either.

I'm not sure why people get so bent out of shape because trades are being entertained, especially those that have merit, and are not ridiculous blockbusters that are only logical in the mind of bernmeister.

Well, I wanted to know so I could shut up all the people pushing MDZ face-first out the door in the case of NYR naming him untouchable.

You could have a direct statement from Sather, Torts and Obama saying MDZ isn't getting moved and people would still bring it up. Don't believe he's untouchable, but their not chomping at the bit to move him either IMHO.

I think pushing him out the door would be more akin to agreeing to something like MDZ for a conditional 7th rounder.

You can say people are undervaluing him, perhaps, but I don't think anyone here is so eager to get rid of him they aren't considering value at all. Almost none of us would do an MDZ for RoR swap either.

I'm not sure why people get so bent out of shape because trades are being entertained, especially those that have merit, and are not ridiculous blockbusters that are only logical in the mind of bernmeister.

You could have a direct statement from Sather, Torts and Obama saying MDZ isn't getting moved and people would still bring it up. Don't believe he's untouchable, but their not chomping at the bit to move him either IMHO.

Dude, I have it on good source that Obama thinks DZ is on his way out.

Granted, I haven't seen much ROR, but I can't help but be a little mystified about trading Del Zotto (+ more!) for a 50 point center. A 40 point D man for a 50 point C? What am I missing? I don't love Del Zotto, and I want another center, and yet I'm very hesitant at the idea.

The simple fact is that the Rangers have notable strengths and weaknesses in their organization. The areas where they have strength, they have so many assets that they are never all going to play for the team at once. They either trade them, or they let them walk for nothing in free agency eventually as they can't all possibly be afforded.

The weaknesses, in the meantime, are weak enough that they'll either cost us dearly in the standings, or we'll have to overpay in free agency to address them.

Not that it's any surprise, but, the weaknesses: Center (both top and depth) and top-line forward prospects in general.

We just had this same debate about 6 months ago regarding Rick Nash. There were people saying four assets was way too much for Nash. Those people were wrong. You can have all the Brandon Dubinskys on the team that you want but those guys are not catalysts like Nash is. I would give up EIGHT Brandon Dubinskys for a Rick Nash, if I had that many. Giving up Dubinsky and three other pieces of the same caliber (in Anisimov, Erixon and a late first) is more than fair.

It's the same discussion here. ROR is more expensive in a trade because of his youth and perceived upside. But if ROR and MDZ are equivalent caliber players at their respective positions (or if ROR is the better player) then it is an absolute no brainer to make that deal.

Fact: MDZ is not going to crack the top 3 defensemen while he is here. He will always be behind McDonagh, Staal, and Girardi (unless one of them is moved).

Therefore, MDZ is a 4th defenseman, 5th defenseman, or 6th defenseman for his entire career here, barring a different trade.

Well, not only do we already have Stralman who can fill one of those spots, but we also have Skjei and McIlrath coming up. If those guys both pan out, well, then there is just no room for one of our defensemen. One has to be traded.

You obviously don't want to trade any of your elite defensemen. So that's no on Staal, McD, and Girardi.

So that leaves trading MDZ, Skjei, McIlrath, and Stralman.

Which of these guys gets you the best return? If MDZ brings you back ROR, but a guy like Skjei only brings you back a lower end winger, then the answer is easy. We need that top center prospect.

MDZ, while painful to lose for right now, is the piece that should go. Skjei or McIlrath can easily fill that #4D or bottom-pairing defenseman role. That role is so, so much less important than a #1 or #2 center is, and that is something we really lack in this organization going forward.

So unless someone has a better idea for picking up an early 20's top line center prospect in some other trade, the MDZ trade makes sense.

As long as it's just for MDZ. Or MDZ and spare parts. I'm not dealing MDZ and Kreider or Miller.

And this is why I am in favor of moving Gaborik and Ricrds in the off-season. Invisible. Players making close to, or above 7 million should be consiste difference makers. Nash is that. He doesn't score, still a factor. Richards and Gaborik are not.

And this is why I am in favor of moving Gaborik and Ricrds in the off-season. Invisible. Players making close to, or above 7 million should be consiste difference makers. Nash is that. He doesn't score, still a factor. Richards and Gaborik are not.

And this is why I am in favor of moving Gaborik and Ricrds in the off-season. Invisible. Players making close to, or above 7 million should be consiste difference makers. Nash is that. He doesn't score, still a factor. Richards and Gaborik are not.

Richards is playing himself right in to a buyout. A week ago, it was almost laughable, but at this point the only thing laughable is how bad he has been. It makes me extra sad because he was a player I loved to watch in Dallas.

Richards is playing himself right in to a buyout. A week ago, it was almost laughable, but at this point the only thing laughable is how bad he has been. It makes me extra sad because he was a player I loved to watch in Dallas.

I highly doubt teams wouldn't take Richards for his close to 5 million/year left on his deal. Calgary? Toronto? Nashville? Dallas? CLB? SOMEONE!

And this is why I am in favor of moving Gaborik and Ricrds in the off-season. Invisible. Players making close to, or above 7 million should be consiste difference makers. Nash is that. He doesn't score, still a factor. Richards and Gaborik are not.

Richards has been awful. His vision, passing, thinking the game...ie: his strengths, have been absent.

Gaborik absolutely refuses to move his feet. On the power play he's stuck on the half boards, he doesn't move.

The issue with Richards worries me more then Gaborik. And I'm hard on Gaborik because I expect more out of him. As I do Richards. But Richards is getting up there in age. After the 13-14 season he will be 34 years old with 6 years remaining at 6.6 per on his contract.

And by that time Del Zotto will be earning 5+ per.

If there was a time to get our hands on a future #1-#2 center it would be now.

O'Reilly and Stepan as a 1-2 would be very good in two years time. The time when discussing a compliance buy out for Richards comes up in summer 2014.

Get Barrie in the return package to replace Del Zotto as an offensive threat from the defense.